Rakesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Rakesh Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without deciding the merits: petitioner directed to file a fresh representation before the BPSC showing the discrepancy; BPSC directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon within 90 days; petitioner thereafter at liberty to challenge the BPSC's order before the appropriate forum.

Issue for consideration

Whether the interview marks allotted by the Bihar Public Service Commission out of 300, contrary to the statutory prescription of a maximum of 150 interview marks under the Bihar Account Service amended Rules 2012 (Advertisement No. 03/2015 for Account Officer), should be reversed or deleted and the final merit list republished accordingly.

Court's answer

Since the petitioner had filed no representation before the Bihar Public Service Commission regarding the interview-marks discrepancy, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a representation afresh before the BPSC showing the discrepancy, and directing the BPSC to pass a reasoned and speaking order on that representation within 90 days. The merits of the 300-versus-150 marks question were not adjudicated.

Ratio / Principle

Thereafter (i.e., once the BPSC acts on the representation), the petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the resulting order before the appropriate forum.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Oral order of the Patna High Court (Dr. Anshuman, J., 06-02-2024) disposing of CWJC No. 997 of 2019. A candidate for the Account Officer post recruited through BPSC Advertisement No. 03/2015 (published 05.02.2015) challenged the allotment of interview marks out of 300, contending it violated the Bihar Account Service amended Rules 2012, which prescribe a maximum of 150 marks for interview. Upon inquiry the Court found the petitioner had filed no representation with the BPSC on the discrepancy; declining to adjudicate the merits, it disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to file a representation afresh before the BPSC and the BPSC to pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon within 90 days, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the BPSC's order before the appropriate forum.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.997 of 2019

======================================================

Rakesh Kumar, Son of Sri Laxman Prasad Resident of Opposite New Bus Stand, Ramchandrapur, Biharsharif, P.S. Laheri, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

The Bihar Public Service Commission through its Chairman Bailey Road, Patna through its Chairman.

The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna.

The Officer on Special Duty, Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. For BPSC : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

4 06-02-2024

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel

for the State present. But, no one appears on behalf of Bihar Public Service Commission.

The present writ petition has been filed for reversing the marks allotted for interview against the advertisement no. 03/2015 published on 05.02.2015 (annexed as Annexure-1) for Account Officer as the allotment of such marks contrary to Bihar Account Service amended Rules 2012 and subsequent prayer regarding issuance of an appropriate writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.997 of 2019(4) dt.06-02-2024 2/3

directing the concerned authority to reverse or delete the marks allotted/allocated against the interview commenced and consequently, the authority follow the process required under statute for 150 marks interview instead of 300 marks and on the basis of the same, final merit list is requested to be published with respect to appointment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the statute, the maximum marks for interview is prescribed as 150 marks, whereas, the Bihar Public Service Commission has published the result showing 300 marks for interview. Counsel further submits that it is a gross violation of the statue.

Upon specific query of the Court that whether representation in this regard has been filed by the petitioner before the Bihar Public Service Commission or not, counsel for the petitioner submits that no such representation is present in the writ petition.

As such, this Court has no option but to dispose off the writ petition directing the petitioner to file the representation afresh before the Bihar Public Service Commission showing the discrepancy and Bihar Public Service Commission is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the representation filed by the petitioner within 90 days. Thereafter, the petitioner shall

Patna High Court CWJC No.997 of 2019(4) dt.06-02-2024 3/3

be at liberty to challenge the same before appropriate forum.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this

writ petition is hereby disposed off.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Divyansh/-

U